When is a “conservative” not a conservative? When it comes to space policy, and his state or district is getting its pork sliced too thin, apparently. (Watch Glenn Reynolds' interview with Rand Simberg here.)

UPDATE: The Senate bill to which the congressmen were objecting last weekend passed the House last night by a vote of 304-118, a much larger majority than the two-thirds required under the rules for it. While their arguments against the Senate’s NASA authorization bill remain ludicrous, it should be noted that the four congressmen in question did end up voting for it, adding to its overwhelming margin, and more in accordance with the principles that conservative Republicans claim to hold. For this they should be praised.

The change in space policy announced at the beginning of the year by the White House would affect many states with NASA centers and contractors. However, it would have a disproportionate impact on Alabama, where the Marshall Space Flight Center was developing the Ares rocket, and Utah, where the solid rocket motors for the Shuttle program (now ending) and the Ares would be developed and manufactured. The representatives for the affected districts would be expected to fight any such change — of course — but it’s been quite unseemly and dismaying to see some of the nonsensical arguments that they have been trotting out in defense of the status quo:

Although the Gordon compromise bill moves dramatically closer to the Senate figure on funding for “commercial” space efforts ($1.2 billion over three years, up from approximately $400 million in the House Committee bill, and close to the Senate figure of $1.6 billion), that is not enough for some in the “commercial” lobbying sector.

They want a monopoly on delivering cargo and crew to the International Space Station (ISS). The Senate bill provides that monopoly. The plan proposed by the current NASA Administration, and enabled by the Senate bill, has:

– no minimum investment of company funds by companies who submit proposals for taxpayer funds,

– no government-vehicle backup (which is viewed as competition),

– no return to the Treasury from profits,

– and no requirements for the companies’ proposals to provide fixed-seat prices for crew to the ISS (in return for up to 99% taxpayer funding of their proposal).

First of all, note the scare quotes around the word “commercial,” obviously meant to cast suspicion on the true nature of these “monopolists.” Also, note that it’s not just “commercial,” but a “‘commercial’ lobbying sector.” As though it is in the lobbying business and simply rent-seeking, and not an industry endeavoring to provide a needed service to the government for a fee.

One would think that a conservative would be familiar with the meaning of the word “monopoly.” But since they apparently aren’t, I’ll provide one, from Merriam-Webster:

This is a word they use to describe multiple providers of a service to the government (and others). In other words, they consider an industry a “monopoly.” But do you know what’s a much better example of a monopoly? ATK, which is the only company in the world that makes large segmented solid rocket boosters.

In fact, and ironically, what they are really defending and attempting to preserve, though they pay lip service to the notion of commercial provision of space transportation services, is the NASAmonopoly on the development and operation of launch systems for astronauts that it has retained for almost half a century.

This despite the fact that it is now a very mature technology, and a private provider will be doing a test launch of a capsule in November. Now if by that they mean the industry believes that it will be difficult to compete with a taxpayer-operated system, and thus hard to close their business cases, and would prefer to not be in such a situation, then perhaps they are guilty as charged — but “monopoly” is a very strange word to describe people with such a concern.

10 Comments, 9 Threads

1.
Warren Bonesteel

Closing Huntsville would put a pretty big hole in Alabama’s economy. NASA should be trimmed and reorganized, but keep the consequences in mind. The last round of base closings in the military should give you a clue.

Of course, things like that are one of the reasons you won’t see any real change once the Republicans take back Congress. You won’t see the lobbying stop. K Street and J street won’t be closed down. You won’t see the earmarks stop. Thus, you won’t see the corruption stop.

Conservatives want their Social Security. Liberals want their welfare. …and Conservatives want military bases all over the planet. Neither side has the will to do what is necessary to save this nation.

nice try to claim this is pork … this is current government “policy” … it is not an earmark … it will be voted on by the full House and Senate …

How could it be that they represent Utah and Alabama ? thats just crazy talk … representing your constituants position in the House of Represenatives … a “true” Conservative would ignore their states voters …

Jeff: constellation is an incredibly wasteful program that accomplishes absolutely nothing of value in space even if it is 100% successful (which it isn’t). The only thing it does accomplish is to create lots of high-paying jobs in a few states (Alabama, Utah, Florida). That is pretty much the definition of pork.

Warren: what conservative wants social security? Most conservatives I know want to abolish it as soon as possible.

Military bases all over the planet are necessary for defense, which is one of the few things that everybody but hardcore libertarians agrees is a valid function of the federal government. That said, we might be able to save a few overseas military bases if we had really cheap access to space…

The only place that a true conservative serves pork should be on his plate! Beltway pork is a no no; that’s why we are gonna toss the dimocrats. Republican legislators had best take heed, you too can find yourselves among the unemployed!

I don’t know why people keep tooting the horn that Utah is some bastion of republican principle. It isn’t. Republicans are in a majority here and don’t often face stiff electoral competition, which means we get the worst kind of republican: the one that doesn’t have to stand for anything or anyone in order to get elected and stay in office. Bennett was a 3 term career do-nothing and he’s finally been tossed out on his ass. Hatch is going to get the axe next, I hope. Our republicrat representatives (and demopublican representative) are just whores suckling at the teat of government. None of them do anything worthwhile except brag about how much of other people’s money they got to spend.

The Obama Space Devastation Program brought to you by the self proclaimed “Science” President (my ass). I would call an industry that has brought high paying jobs to Alabama, California, Florida, Louisiana, Maryland, Mississippi, Texas, Virginia, and Utah to name a few, as “pork” that has allowed many families to bring home the bacon to the benefit of the country and the economy.

Looks like this “community organizer” is very good at decimating communities, he just has a bigger playground to do it in now.

Lynn: the way NASA does space operations is incredibly inefficient. So you need lots of man-hours per flight and create lots of jobs. So if you want to keep the maximum number of jobs while accomplishing almost nothing in space, the current program is almost perfect.

Besides, an industry that has only one product and one customer is not much of an industry.

Well you should be happy then, sending pork to Russia. I find that most people that accuse NASA of being inefficient are usually totally ignorant of what it takes to send humans into space or unmanned rockets for that matter.

and….finally….for the last time.

NASA contracts with PRIVATE COMPANIES to put manned and unmanned rockets into space. Thousands of private companies benefit from NASA….geez it was how many years ago when a couple of kooks were trying to fly (107 years ago). And look where we are now, pretending that NASA is inefficient.

Someone needs to do a dirty jobs show about space exploration. This industry is not Captain Kirk clean and neat telling neat and clean Scotty to go warp speed. There is much sweat and tears going into each launch of a rocket. Many men and women work hard to get people and payloads safely into orbit. They deserve to make a decent wage for themselves, their families, and the communities.

The Obama Space Devastation Program one small step back for one man, one giant leap backwards for mankind.

This is so ludicrous. I lost my job when the government went from cost plus to fixed price with milestones because my company was top heavy with administrators. I didn’t whine. I went out and got another job. I see no reason why the employees of these companies, if they are competent in the first place, can’t do the same. The same should apply to the companies.

The pols here in Florida are even more in NASA’s pocket, for obvious reasons. Outside the District of Corruption, there’s probably no place more dependent on federal loot than Brevard County, where Cape Canaveral is located. Go to “floridatoday.com”, the local paper, and see the shirt-rending and teeth-gnashing for yourself. Muslims face Mecca when they pray; Brevard residents, regardless of faith, face DC.

NASA has been living off its lunar legacy since 1972. Now it’s just another bloated bureaucracy thrashing around for any excuse to justify its budget. Also, NASA is what has kept the private sector from competing in space — they happily launch satellites at megabuck losses apiece at prices private launchers can’t match, knowing the taxpayers will foot the difference.